sharpest lens ever

[Drew Wiley]

Brian - the Readyload and Quickload holders were the worst - bent the film badly near the
insertion side. I heavily modified a 545 holder, but it will only get about two more trips out
of it due to my film sleeves running low. For color 8x10 I use adhesive holders, since I'm
more likely to make a big color enlargement than black-and-white, which I print only up to
20x24. Most black and white film is stiffer than color anyway, though the Kodak estar base
is pretty good. For ordinary 4x5 work I just use regular Lisco or Fidelity holders - the smaller size buckles less than 8x10. But I check my camera film plane with a special depth
micrometer. Once found a few air bubbles in the varnish that might affect focus, and sanded these out. Never had a warped back or holder yet, but then, I've never bought used holders.

[Ari]

Sharpest lens ever? That's easy, a Fujinon W-210, old version.
Asked and answered

[gevalia]

This is a keeping up with the jones' question (in other words, a digital yahoo question). Stay thirsty my friend.

[genotypewriter]

How did you focus that image? It's pretty d**m sharp!

Sorry I just saw your question. If you follow the first link below you'll be taken to a bigger version of the crop that's better than the original one I posted earlier in this thread. The description also explains the shooting a bit too

2600x2450 pixel crop: http://www.flickr.com/photos/genotypewriter/8803512574/


Smaller full image: http://www.flickr.com/photos/genotypewriter/6806479707/

[Jim Cole]

Strange topic; however, I'll bite:

Schneider 110mm SSXL.

I agree with this choice and refer to mine as "scary sharp".

[Ian Greenhalgh]

I only divide lenses into two categories 'sharp enough' and 'not sharp enough'.

I have found the former tend to outweight the latter by a large margin.

Also, there are so many other factors to consider that can affect sharpness.

[Nathan Potter]

I'll agree with Jim Cole and Lachlan that for common lenses IME the Schneider SSXL 110 mm is the sharpest I've used but I suspect that is only by a bit over a few other legend type lenses.

If you're doing macro type LF work at some magnification then the rare Nikkor macros can't be beat. These include the Ultra Micro Nikkors and other limited edition lenses for 35 mm. Under real and significant magnification they can cover 4X5 format. An arcane list at the site shown below gives a non technical view of some of these lenses. Occasionally they show up on ebay. Generally the high degree of resolution requires monochromatic light, with the early versions (500 nm or so). Later they quickly moved into the UV for use with mercury lines. But the older versions can be phenomenal for B&W if the film is sensitized for the wavelength.

I had once tried to convince my employer to obtain the early 105 f/2.8 version designed in the 1960s but to no avail. IIRC (it's been a long time) I think that lens was designed around the 540 nm monochromatic line and covered 2 X 2 inches at 105 mm. I think it was rated at about 400 lp/mm. Of course on 4X5 film under real magnification the resolution is reduced on the film by roughly the magnification factor.

akiyama nhs2004

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

[Drew Wiley]

The sharpest lens is the one you dropped and then cut your hand on picking up the glass.

[paulr]

Schneider makes many lenses sharper than the 110 ssxl. Just look at their MTF curves. A quick look at the data from both Schneider and Rodenstock will tell you this mystical lens won't be found among wide angle or telephoto designs. Stick to the latest generations of normal lenses for this hunt.

My bet is that the sharpest, by a large margin, will be the Rodenstock Apo Sironar digital. The longer focal lengths will cover 4x5 at infinity, although not with more than a few mm of movements, and Rodenstock probably won't admit the lenses cover this much. The lenses won't be in speck out near the edges of the image circle. But they will be in another league from any of the lenses we're used to.

[Atul Mohidekar]

Schneider makes many lenses sharper than the 110 ssxl. Just look at their MTF curves. A quick look at the data from both Schneider and Rodenstock will tell you this mystical lens won't be found among wide angle or telephoto designs. Stick to the latest generations of normal lenses for this hunt.

My bet is that the sharpest, by a large margin, will be the Rodenstock Apo Sironar digital. The longer focal lengths will cover 4x5 at infinity, although not with more than a few mm of movements, and Rodenstock probably won't admit the lenses cover this much. The lenses won't be in speck out near the edges of the image circle. But they will be in another league from any of the lenses we're used to.

The digital lenses from Schneider and Rodenstock have amazing MTF curves, but limited ICs. Many years ago when I was doing 6x9 photography, I looked at the Schneider MTF data and found Digitar 120mm had much better MTF charts than 110mm XL. I had also heard that the digital lenses are "optimized" for larger apertures (e.g. f/11). I communicated with a Schneider engineer and was told that the 120mm Digitar at f/22 would be much sharper at the edge of the IC than 110mm XL at the same point in the IC, except the IC of the Digitar is much smaller. I bought the Digitar at that time for 6x9 and have since used it for 4x5. Yes, it does cover 4x5 with small room for movements. It is the sharpest LF lens I have. I have also compared it to Rodenstock Sironar-S 135mm, another very sharp lens. In my subjective, non-scientific tests, the Digitar is sharper than the Sironar. But that is comparing a digital lens with limited IC to an analog lens with much larger IC - the Rodenstock digital lenses should be comparable to the Schneider Digitar lenses.

// Atul